E.H. Going down??

Printable View

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

06-25-2012, 08:01
aahorn

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bailey Guns

Marco Rubio was born in Miami. As in, Miami, FL. He's a natural born citizen and it eligible to be president.

but his parents are cubans. isn't that where he loses his eligibility?
06-25-2012, 08:23
Bailey Guns

No. The constitution has no requirement that your parents be American citizens.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Article 2, Section 1

No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

You wouldn't even have to be born in the US if your parents were US citizens. For example, you're born on a military base in another country. You would still be a natural born citizen.
06-25-2012, 08:49
68Charger

yeah, it's not that simple..
http://www.federalistblog.us/2008/11...tizen_defined/

here's a key paragraph that would apply here:
Rep. John A. Bingham commenting on Section 1992 said it means “every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen.” (Cong. Globe, 39th, 1st Sess., 1291 (1866))

so his parents were Cuban- but where did their allegiance lie?

This, of course, should be part of the vetting process...
06-25-2012, 08:56
68Charger

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bailey Guns

No. The constitution has no requirement that your parents be American citizens.

You wouldn't even have to be born in the US if your parents were US citizens. For example, you're born on a military base in another country. You would still be a natural born citizen.

I agree the constitution lacks a clear definition, that is why it has to go to case law, and it can get complicated.
06-25-2012, 09:05
Bailey Guns

Yeah, I think it is that simple.

His parents were here legally as political refugees. He was born in Miami. He's a natural-born citizen.

The only evidence I can find that would dispute that seems to come from people who are fabricating some requirement not in the Constitution.

I think Art 2, Sec 1 is simple and clear and means exactly what it says...just like the 2nd Amend.
06-25-2012, 09:06
Bailey Guns

President Chester Arthur was born in the US to an American mother and an Irish father. There didn't seem to be any issues on whether or not he was eligible.
06-25-2012, 09:22
68Charger

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bailey Guns

Yeah, I think it is that simple.

His parents were here legally as political refugees. He was born in Miami. He's a natural-born citizen.

The only evidence I can find that would dispute that seems to come from people who are fabricating some requirement not in the Constitution.

I think Art 2, Sec 1 is simple and clear and means exactly what it says...just like the 2nd Amend.

The problem isn't in Article 2... it's in the legal definition of "natural-born citizen"

That is NOT clearly defined in the constitution, so case law is required to define it. (as in what has the SCOTUS decided, for one)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bailey Guns

President Chester Arthur was born in the US to an American mother and an Irish father. There didn't seem to be any issues on whether or not he was eligible.

That's why I said it gets complicated- and it's not that simple.
would you really advocate that if it turned out that Hitler fathered a child that happened to be born on US soil, that he should be eligible?

Someone who's parents CLEARLY have no loyalty- or even hostility towards the US should not be eligible... the burden of proof is upon them to prove they were loyal to the US at the time.

But now I'm getting into the SPIRIT of the law, rather than the letter of it.

ETA: What I'm really saying here is that for Rubio to go on the ticket, the GOP really needs to address this legally- not just ignore it like the DNC did...
06-25-2012, 09:25
Bailey Guns

Found the case I was looking for: US v Wong Kim Ark

The SCOTUS ruled (in 1898) that pretty much anyone born in the US was a natural born citizen with few exceptions.

Sec 1 of the 14th Amend seems pretty clear, too.

I'm looking through my Heritage Guide to the Constitution. It discusses this issue at length and comes to the same conclusion...if you're born here (again, with few exceptions such as born to parents who are foreign diplomats) you're a natural born citizen.
06-25-2012, 09:31
Bailey Guns

Quote:

Originally Posted by 68Charger

The problem isn't in Article 2... it's in the legal definition of "natural-born citizen"

That is NOT clearly defined in the constitution, so case law is required to define it. (as in what has the SCOTUS decided, for one)

That's why I said it gets complicated- and it's not that simple.
would you really advocate that if it turned out that Hitler fathered a child that happened to be born on US soil, that he should be eligible?

Someone who's parents CLEARLY have no loyalty- or even hostility towards the US should not be eligible... the burden of proof is upon them to prove they were loyal to the US at the time.

But now I'm getting into the SPIRIT of the law, rather than the letter of it.

ETA: What I'm really saying here is that for Rubio to go on the ticket, the GOP really needs to address this legally- not just ignore it like the DNC did...

Good discussion! Here's a quote from the Heritage Guide:

Quote:

Under the longstanding English common-law principle of jus soli, persons born within the territory of the sovereign (other than children of enemy aliens or foreign diplomats) are citizens from birth. Thus, those persons born within the United States are "natural born citizens" and eligible to be President.

So that would pretty much rule out your Hitler's child scenario.
06-25-2012, 09:38
68Charger

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bailey Guns

His parents were here legally as political refugees. He was born in Miami. He's a natural-born citizen.

And this is false- they immigrated in 1956, before Castro came to power- they were just immigrants, not political refugees

so the question of their loyalty should be vetted.

Since they did become US citizens by the time he was 4, they'd likely qualify him as a NBC... but I believe it should be done in a legal proceeding so there is no question.

ETA: when I made the original statement that he "fails the NBC test", I should have added something about "at first appearance" or "on the surface"
That was bad wording on my part.

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page